No, never, absolutely not and under no circumstances. Property owners are the property owners, not the government. Also, the price you get for eminent domain is way lower than what you value the home for, otherwise you would have yourself sold it at market value long ago. Property owners get screwed twice under the deal.
No. The foreclosing agency in this matter would negotiate back to homeowners at it's actual value after eminent domain and that would reduce their mortgage burden. Also reflecting fair market value. That is the way I read it.
I voted good idea because if the Gov't had not bailed out the banks, the real estate values would have dropped significantly lower. Many more mortgages would have been even more underwater and there would have been more foreclosures and, as distressing as that might have been, the banks would have been the largest losers. We bailed them out. The banks mortgage tranches were faulty and the banks deserved fair deserts. That didn't happen because the gov't used taxpayer funds to mitigate those losses. I am for the homeowner because this is a "bogus" valuation of his asset to sustain minimum Reserve requirements by the banks.
Is this fair?
Is this different than eminent domain used against homewoners?
If bankers had not been bailed out, would home prices be much lower?
Are we trying to protect bankers again?
Richmond’s rules: Why one California town is keeping Wall Street up at night
Richmond’s rules: Why one California town is keeping Wall Street up at night
"For communities across the land -- North Las Vegas, San Bernardino County, Calif., Chicago -- where too many are stuck with house payments beyond what they can afford, this was the nuclear option. While those cities backed away, Richmond hit the
button.
The mechanism? Eminent domain, the power of the government to seize private property for public use, which has not typically been used to help poor neighborhoods. After five years of the federal government gently nudging banks to forgive homeowners debt they took on in better days, cities have found a legal weapon the financial industry truly fears.
The stability of those housing markets, and the banks that profit from it, could depend on the fallout.
The strategy's complexity has left stakeholders to lean on dogfight rhetoric: From the community activists, "Save homes, stop foreclosures." And the Realtors, "Stop investor greed." And the lawyers for the investors, "Prevent this unconstitutional
investment scheme." "
Richmond’s rules: Why one California town is keeping Wall Street up at night
Is this fair?
Is this different than eminent domain used against homewoners?
If bankers had not been bailed out, would home prices be much lower?
Are we trying to protect bankers again?
Richmond’s rules: Why one California town is keeping Wall Street up at night
Richmond’s rules: Why one California town is keeping Wall Street up at night
"For communities across the land -- North Las Vegas, San Bernardino County, Calif., Chicago -- where too many are stuck with house payments beyond what they can afford, this was the nuclear option. While those cities backed away, Richmond hit the
button.
The mechanism? Eminent domain, the power of the government to seize private property for public use, which has not typically been used to help poor neighborhoods. After five years of the federal government gently nudging banks to forgive homeowners debt they took on in better days, cities have found a legal weapon the financial industry truly fears.
The stability of those housing markets, and the banks that profit from it, could depend on the fallout.
The strategy's complexity has left stakeholders to lean on dogfight rhetoric: From the community activists, "Save homes, stop foreclosures." And the Realtors, "Stop investor greed." And the lawyers for the investors, "Prevent this unconstitutional
investment scheme." "
Richmond’s rules: Why one California town is keeping Wall Street up at night
Is this fair?
Is this different than eminent domain used against homewoners?
If bankers had not been bailed out, would home prices be much lower?
Are we trying to protect bankers again?
Richmond’s rules: Why one California town is keeping Wall Street up at night
Richmond’s rules: Why one California town is keeping Wall Street up at night
"For communities across the land -- North Las Vegas, San Bernardino County, Calif., Chicago -- where too many are stuck with house payments beyond what they can afford, this was the nuclear option. While those cities backed away, Richmond hit the
button.
The mechanism? Eminent domain, the power of the government to seize private property for public use, which has not typically been used to help poor neighborhoods. After five years of the federal government gently nudging banks to forgive homeowners debt they took on in better days, cities have found a legal weapon the financial industry truly fears.
The stability of those housing markets, and the banks that profit from it, could depend on the fallout.
The strategy's complexity has left stakeholders to lean on dogfight rhetoric: From the community activists, "Save homes, stop foreclosures." And the Realtors, "Stop investor greed." And the lawyers for the investors, "Prevent this unconstitutional
investment scheme." "
Richmond’s rules: Why one California town is keeping Wall Street up at night
Is this fair?
Is this different than eminent domain used against homewoners?
If bankers had not been bailed out, would home prices be much lower?
Are we trying to protect bankers again?
That is crazy. I knew a lot of California was on the socialist bandwagon. Just one more example of how the socialist are trying to twist laws.
Is it socializing of profits instead of the current mantra of privatizing profit and socializing of liabilities? I use Nuke Plants and "Too Big To Fail Banks" as the prime examples of socialized liabilities and privatized profits.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?